Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures

'The Apocrypha' could be purchased for this book alone. I started seeking out these lost books on the internet, but it is so much more valuable to have a hard copy of these works. The books of Ezras are amazing as well. 1 Ezra is in the standard Bible, and the books in 'The Apocrypha.

Kjv Bible With Apocrypha Free
Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures Study
Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures Fulfilled
Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures King James Version
Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures John Hagee

Despite what many Christians believe, there is not one single version of the Bible. Biblical canon has changed repeatedly over the centuries with books being added or removed from the official scriptures and that process still continues today. The Bibles read by Catholics, Orthodox Christians and members of different denominations of Protestantism may contain very different books. There are more academically inclined Bibles that contain references and extra resources and “more complete” Bibles that contain books that were previously removed from the canon. Which “extra” books are included in these Bibles varies wildly.

Kjv Bible With Apocrypha Free

The Encyclopedia of Lost and Rejected Scriptures: The Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha - Kindle edition by Lumpkin, Joseph, Lumpkin, Joseph. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading The Encyclopedia of Lost and Rejected Scriptures: The Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha.
New Testament Apocrypha III - REJECTED SCRIPTURES The Gospel of Philip Translated by Wesley W. Isenberg A Hebrew makes another Hebrew, and such a person is called 'proselyte'.

The development of the “official” biblical canon was a lengthy process that began shortly before the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. Emperor Constantine commissioned 50 copies of the Bible for the Church at Constantinople, but this was not considered to be an official canon for Christianity. It was not until 367 A.D., that the first version of the Christian canon was officially developed. It was Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, who listed the books of the New Testament and instructed them to be kanonizomena or canonized. The canon of the New Testament, however, was not ratified until the 5th century.

Biblical canon was again questioned following the Protestant Reformation. The Church of England and English Calvinism both adopted slightly altered canons in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, and the Synod of Jerusalem make minor tweaks to the list of Old Testament books accepted by Orthodox Christians. With this turbulent history filled with additions and removals of books, there has been a rise in Christians who prefer Bibles that contain these “extra” books which are collectively known as the Apocrypha or Apocryphal Books. Here are five books that are not included in the Bible that every Christian should read.

The Gospel of Thomas would look very strange to most Christians as it contains almost none of the narrative details that are common in the canonical New Testament gospels. Instead, the Gospel of Thomas is composed almost entirely of the logia, or sayings, of Jesus. Many of these sayings are repeated verbatim in the other New Testament gospels. When a person accounts for slight variations as result of translation differences, the text is almost identical to the teachings found in the canonized New Testament. There are, however, a few extra sayings that are not included in the canonical gospels, and the Gospel of Thomas includes no explicit references to Christ’s crucifixion, His resurrection, the final judgment or a messianic understanding of Jesus.

The Gospel of Thomas was not added to the official canon because it is the epitome of a Gnostic text. Gnosticism was an early form of Christianity that was declared heresy by those that would eventually become the Orthodox Church. Gnosticism eventually died out at some point in the second or third century, and many of their writings were lost making discoveries such as the Gospel of Thomas of great value to the historical record.

The Book of Enoch

New Testament apocryphal books tend to get more focus than Old Testament apocrypha, but the Book of Enoch is always a popular topic of discussion among those familiar with it. The Book of Enoch, also referred to simply as Enoch, was written sometime during the 2nd century B.C. and is very different from the Old Testament texts that were later canonized. The Book of Enoch was attributed to Enoch, the grandfather of Noah, and contains more traditionally mythological elements than are found in most of the Old Testament. One such example is the Niphilim. The Niphilim are mentioned briefly in the canonical versions of Genesis and Numbers, but Enoch expands greatly on their birth, rise to prominence and destruction. The Book of Enoch also details Enoch’s journey through Earth, Sheol and his interactions with both the angels of heaven and fallen angels. Enoch’s fate is left somewhat ambiguous at the end of the text and open to many different interpretations.

The Infancy Gospel

Also called the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Infancy Gospel is a biographical gospel focused on the life of Jesus as a child. This gospel is believed to date back to the second century and to have been written by Gnostic Christians. Interest in the Infancy Gospel has exploded since its translation out of old Coptic because it details Jesus Christ’s childhood, a period of his life that is not described or depicted in the canonical gospels. This gospel was considered heretical in part for its depiction of Jesus as a child. Rather than the wise teacher that the canonical gospels focus on, the young Jesus in the Infancy Gospels has a mischievous streak and takes delight in such simple childhood pleasures as crafting clay birds.

The Infancy Gospel of Thomas is not the only apocryphal gospel that depicts portions of Jesus’s life as a child. The Syriac Infancy Gospel and Gospel of Psuedo-Matthew also deal with the life of a young Christ.

The Gospel of Mary

Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures Study

Scholars do not always consider the Gospel of Mary to be a true “gospel” because the text does not have the same focus on the teachings of the adult Jesus as the canonical gospels. There is also a great deal of debate among scholars as to which Mary is the narrator of the text. Most people argue that the titular narrator is either the Virgin Mary or Mary Magdalene, but neither theory can be confirmed due to the state of the original text. The text is missing a total of 10 pages, six at the beginning and four in the middle of the text. The sections of the text that are intact depict a scene after the resurrection of Christ when Jesus appears to the disciples. He gives Mary special or secret teachings through a vision. Mary shares these teachings with the other disciples, but the other disciples are skeptical that Christ would trust such important “teachings privately [to] a woman and not openly to [the male apostles].” Peter and Andrew in particular question Mary’s truthfulness while Levi defends her. It is likely for the same reason that the text was stricken from the canon.

The Acts of Paul and Thecla

The Acts of Paul and Thecla, also called the Acts of Paul or the Acts of Thecla, details the life and journeys of the young Christian convert, Thecla. Thecla was a young virgin who was engaged to a wealthy and powerful man in the city of Iconium. When she heard Paul preaching about chastity, however, she refused to marry the man and was sentenced to be burned at the stake. God, however, intervened and saved Thecla’s life.

Thecla joined Paul on his journey to Antioch where she ran afoul of the magistrate of the city when she refused to sleep with him. The magistrate ordered Thecla to be killed several times, but each time she was saved by God. In one of her final trials, Thecla threw herself into a body of water filled with sharks. The sharks were killed by God, and Thecla baptized herself.

It is theorized that the Acts of Paul and Thecla was kept out of the official canon because Thecla’s actions were too powerful for a woman. She acted with all the power of a man, something unacceptable at the time.

The Bible would look very different were all the Apocrypha included in the book. There would also be very different portrayals of Christ found in the Bible’s pages if texts such as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas were included. Though these texts are not found in biblical canon, Christians can now read many of them due to the tireless work of translators. Ancient texts continue to be translated today, and more hidden gospels continue to be found. The pendulum appears to have swung back the other way. Rather than an ever-shrinking canon, the “complete” list of Bible books is only continuing to grow.

Roman Catholics may tell you, 'You Protestants are missing part of the Bible. We have the rest of it.' [Note: These people's leaders (popes, priests, etc.) have led them astray to this wrong belief.] This comment about missing books can throw people off, but it no longer has to. These popish additions to the Bible are commonly called the Apocrypha or sometimes the Deuterocanonical books. This is a short treatise on WHY these books are not in the Bible.

What is the Apocrypha anyway?

Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures Fulfilled

The Apocrypha is a collection of uninspired, spurious books written by various individuals. The Catholic religion considers these books as scripture just like a Bible-believer believes that the 66 books in the Authorized Version of 1611 of the Bible are the word of God, i.e., Genesis to Revelation. We are going to examine some verses from the Apocrypha later in our discussion.

At the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Catholic institution pronounced the following apocryphal books sacred. They asserted that the apocryphal books together with unwritten tradition are of God and are to be received and venerated as the Word of God. So now you have the Bible, the Apocrypha and Catholic Tradition as co-equal sources of truth for the Catholic. In reality, it seems obvious that the Bible is the last source of truth for Catholics. Roman Catholic doctrine comes primarily from tradition stuck together with a few Bible names. In my reading of Catholic materials, I find notes like this: 'You have to keep the Bible in perspective.' Catholics have been deceived into not believing that the Bible is God's complete revelation for man [but they can come out of these deceptions in an instant if they will only believe the Bible as it is written].

The Roman Catholic Apocrypha

Tobit
Judith
Wisdom
Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
First and Second Maccabees
Additions to Esther and Daniel

Apocryphal Books rejected by the Catholic Religion:

First and Second Esdras
Prayer of Manasses
Susanna*

*A reader says: 'Susanna is in the Roman Catholic canon. It is Daniel 13.'

Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible.

Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language (the Old Testament was written in Hebrew). All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin.
None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration.
The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church (I'm certainly not talking about the Catholic religion. The Roman Catholic 'Church' is not Christian).
The Apocrypha contains fabulous statements which not only contradict the 'canonical' scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.
The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. The following verses are taken from the Apocrypha translation by Ronald Knox dated 1954:
Basis for the doctrine of purgatory:
2 Maccabees 12:43-45, 2.000 pieces of silver were sent to Jerusalem for a sin-offering...Whereupon he made reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
Salvation by works:
Ecclesiasticus 3:30, Water will quench a flaming fire, and alms maketh atonement for sin.
Tobit 12:8-9, 17, It is better to give alms than to lay up gold; for alms doth deliver from death, and shall purge away all sin.
Magic:
Tobit 6:5-8, If the Devil, or an evil spirit troubles anyone, they can be driven away by making a smoke of the heart, liver, and gall of a fish...and the Devil will smell it, and flee away, and never come again anymore.
Mary was born sinless (immaculate conception):
Wisdom 8:19-20, And I was a witty child and had received a good soul. And whereas I was more good, I came to a body undefiled.
It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assasination and magical incantation.
No apocryphal book is referred to in the New Testament whereas the Old Testament is referred to hundreds of times.
Because of these and other reasons, the apocryphal books are only valuable as ancient documents illustrative of the manners, language, opinions and history of the East.

Wasn't the Apocrypha in the King James?

The King James translators never considered the Apocrypha the word of God. As books of some historical value (e.g., details of the Maccabean revolt), the Apocrypha was sandwiched between the Old and New Testaments as an appendix of reference material. This followed the format that Luther had used. Luther prefaced the Apocrypha with a statement:

'Apocrypha--that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriputres, and yet are profitable and good to read.' King James Version Defended page 98.

In 1599, TWELVE YEARS BEFORE the King James Bible was published, King James himself said this about the Apocrypha:

'As to the Apocriphe bookes, I OMIT THEM because I am no Papist (as I saidbefore)...'

King James Charles Stewart
Basilicon Doron, page 13

In his, 'A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches,'--found in his Workes (a collection of the king's writings)--King James said this--

'...Is it a small corrupting of the Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha of equall faith with the canonicall Scriptures...?'

Not only this, but the sixth article of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church ofEngland (1571 edition. The Church of England published the Authorized King James Version) states that

(1) the Old and New Testaments are the Bible--

In the name of the Holy, we do vnderstande those canonical bookes of the olde and newe Testament, of whose authoritie was never any doubt in the Churche...

(2) the apocrypha is not the Bible--

And the other bookes, (as Hierome sayeth), the Churche doth reade for example of life and instruction of manners: but yet

doth it not applie them to establish any doctrene.

Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977, Vol. III, pp.489-491.

The Hampton Court Document came as a result of the famous Hampton Court Conference of 1604 when King James specially commanded the translation of the Bible that would one day bear his name. Concerning the apocrypha and the Church of England, it states--

The Apocrypha, that hath some repugnancy to the canonical scriptures, shall not be read...

Select Statutes and Other Constitutional Documents Illustrative of the Reigns of Elizabeth and James I,
edited by G.W. Prothero, Fellow of King's College, Cambridge, 1894, p. 416

Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures King James Version

The Apocrypha began to be omitted from the Authorized Version in 1629. Puritans and Presbyterians lobbied for the complete removal of the Apocrypha from the Bible and in 1825 the British and Foreign Bible Society agreed. From that time on, the Apocrypha has been eliminated from practically all English Bibles--Catholic Bibles and some pulpit Bibles excepted.

Not even all Catholic 'Church Fathers' believed the Apocrypha was scripture.

Not that this really means anything. The truth is not validated by the false. Nevertheless, this may be of interest to some... Jerome (340-420) rejected the Apocrypha:

'As the Church reads the books of Judith and Tobit and Maccabees but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so also it reads Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine.'Jerome
Jerome's preface to the books of Solomon

According to Edward Hills in The King James Version Defended p. 98 other famous Catholics with this viewpoint include Augustine (354-430 who at first defended the Apocrypha as canonical), Pope Gregory the Great (540-604), Cardinal Ximenes, and Cardinal Cajetan.

There are other spurious books.

These include the Pseudepigrapha which contains Enoch, Michael the Archangel, and Jannes and Jambres. Many spurious books falsely claim to have been written by various Old Testament patriarchs. They were composed between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D. There are lots of these spurious books like The Assumption of Moses, Apocalypse of Elijah, and Ascension of Isaiah.

Ethiopian Apocrypha Iiirejected Scriptures John Hagee

Concerning the Dead Sea Scrolls, there may be some information in them that parallels the Masoretic Text, but there are fables in them, too. I went to see the scrolls a few years ago with great expectation but found a bunch of fables. The best defense against error in any form (unauthorized Bibles and religions) is a solid knowledge of the AUTHORIZED (King James) Version of 1611 of the Bible. If you read it, forgeries become readily apparent.

Those that are unsaved may wish to read our article entitled, How to Get to Heaven.